Friday, December 3, 2010

A couple of articles have been making the rounds lately. While to me they are obviously satire, some are taking them hook line and sinker. A quote from one of my favorite Tom & Jerry episodes comes to mind: “Don’t you believe it.”

This story supposedly took place in Denver. It never happened. And the quote from the “Head of Scanning???” Well, no such position exists and nobody by that name works for TSA. Which means, it was never said by a TSA employee. Some are upset – an understandable reaction, if it were true. But it’s not. The article attributes the quote as being given to CNN. Try Googling it and see what you come up with. (Hint – it won’t be a CNN article.)

This story supposedly took place in San Francisco. Again, this story is false. There are no reports to back this up. If the man was cuffed as the article states, there would be a police record as our officers do not use handcuffs.

There are a lot of satirical articles and parody Twitter accounts out there right now. By all means, enjoy them and have a laugh at our expense, but “Don’t you believe it.”

Ayn & Anon - While you and I know this is satire, tell that to the professional journalists who have called about these stories. Tell that to all of the people who are complaining to our Office of Civil Rights and Liberties about the Denver piece. When I first saw these a few days ago, I immediately dismissed them. Unfortunately, others did not.

Your credibility as a government agency or whatever is pretty low. Tons of people suffering at your policy of enhanced pat-downs, claims of same-gender pat-downs being violated, employees being abusive and yelling things like they are God or have power, etc. Not to mention the whole controversy with the lack of safety with the xray machines. I think the reason for those satirical articles is to point out how hypocritical your organization is. Mainly everyone can see with those articles that TSA is abusing innocent people for a reason that is incompetent. It's so that Chertoff can make money and lots of it, pushing his machines into every point of travel there is. That's only on the light side. The dark side is that your organization is a bully like Big Brother from 1984, planting its boot into the face of humanity. No one cares that these articles exist. They may or may not believe them, but the sentiment is the same and still valid.

Indeed, people shouldn't believe false claims, but TSA keeps claiming the xrays are safe, pat-downs are same-gender, but instead of addressing these claims, it makes a statement to not believe satire. If people were to believe everything, it still wouldn't make any difference. TSA is nothing more than a very bad satire itself, one with seriously bad consequences for the American people as they are treated less and less like human beings and more like cattle by their own government and industry.

Should we believe the story about the TSA Behavior Detection Officer who allegedly kidnapped a woman and then attempted suicide? Shouldn't his fellow BDOs have been able to spot his violent, suicidal behaviors after working with him for five years?

Oh yeah. I forgot. Behavior detection is junk science that makes for decent television and security theater.

Fine, Bob, but what about all the stories of male TSO's searching women, the accounts of child crying and upset after "enhanced pat-downs", etc. The New York Times says " there are far too many reports of T.S.A. agents groping passengers, using male agents to search female passengers, mocking passengers and disdaining complaints." http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/20/opinion/20sat3.html?_r=2&ref=transportation_security_administration

People will believe anything about TSA because it looks like TSA will do just about anything, as long as it's stupid, dishonest, or both, from the fellow who disabled nine aircraft with "inspections" to the relentless pilfering from checked baggage and carry-ons, and on to the numerous cases of TSOs seen in plain open areas fully aleep in full TSA uniform. In one case they had to shut down half the airport (in Seattle) and rescreen huge numbers of people because there was no knowing who may have walked by the sleeping agent and what they might have had with them.

For once I agree with Blogger Bob. People should take the time to make sure the news they are protesting about is real.

Of course it's a lot easier to defend people for making this mistake when these days, truth is stranger than fiction, and these articles - while satirical - are not that different from real ones.

Of course there are tons of real stories - the breast milk lady; the TSA putting the CNN reporter on the watch list story; the new polls showing a growing dissatisfaction in the TSA; the stories of lawmakers looking to stop the TSA strip-scanning in their states; and so on that do *not* get covered. Including the ridiculous questions of "this blade is allowed but this identical one with a screw taken out is not" kind of stories.

So how about we make a deal, Bob - we'll do our best to ask our outraged and poorly informed brethren to stop spreading lies, and you guys answer some stuff negative to the TSA instead of turning the blog into a auto-propaganda machine.

When stories like these are real last week, and the week before, don't be too shocked when people mistakenly believe them this week...

Also, I'm still very much interested in the official response to the mother with breast milk. My wife is expecting our child in March, and will be flying frequently for work afterwards. Should she expect the same sort of targeted harassment and complete disregard for your own rules?How can she better handle the situation than the woman did in the video, so she will be able to make her flight and feed our son?

Blogger Bob- As a lactating mother I am interested in knowing if the story about a mothers milk not being considered medical liquid when she flew out of Pheonix is satire? When she flew the following week was 'harassed' by agents who 'targeted' her because of the previous week incident. I will be flying in the next few months and this story has me considering driving. Will you comment?Thank you Dawn

I know there are a lot of stories that are false. The two you mention are absolutely blatantly so - not because of the content, but because of the source. Readers aren't stupid.

But what about the stories that are true? Like in Phoenix, when a woman was held for half an hour (until she missed her flight) because the TSA staff did not know their own rules? (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2XhnZlmLGK8)

Or the wheelchair-bound, nonverbal, sexual assault survivor who the TSA separated from her family and service dog, and performed an invasive pat-down upon? (http://inciid.blogspot.com/2010/08/tsa-violates-10-year-old-child-at.html)

There's been no statement from the TSA about either of these horrific cases.

I think you really need to devote a blog posting to this topic. I've watched other videos where people claim to have been mistreated by the TSA but were in fact acting stupidly, but this is not one of them.

As the video stands it really looks as if this woman was a victim of harassment, and in fact acted impecibly through the whole incident.

Specifically, I'd like to know :

1. What is the purpose of the 'special inspection area'? It's a glass box with no chair right in the middle of the screening area, that seems to have no other purpose than to humiliate and degrade the passenger... i.e. physcological abuse. This poor woman spent 47 minutes standing up in there in full view of everyone.

2. She repeatidly told the agents she would be late for her flight yet they ignored her.

3. The policemans comments make it sound as if this wasn't an isolated incident. Why would he threaten to arrest her just for trying to get some sense out of the whole situation?

4. Why didn't the agents know the procedure on breast milk screening, or didn't they care... she was going to be victimised anyway?

5. Why did the TSA maanger fail to follow TSA guidelines even after reading the print out?

6. How is it safer to have the breast milk in seperate containers, that can still be taken on board, rather than in one complete container??

7. Why were 30 minutes removed from the videos the TSA sent this woman?

If this incident does turn out to be a case of victimisation i sincerely hope all those involved are fired. The TSA's reputation is low enough already without having small minded individuals pulling it down even further.

Your PR operation is a disaster. As you might note from the responses that you're getting, if you begin responding to such things it only raises the question of why you DON'T respond to other more reliable news stories.

I feel for you having to refute the bogus stories, I really do. Unfortunately, the problem you are dealing with is that there are enough real stories that it is difficult for most people who weed out fact from fiction.

For example, just reading through the other comments here as well as on Twitter, a lot of people are requesting some sort of fact v. fiction answer back from you on the mother in Phoenix with the breast milk issue. This one is actually a few weeks old and would do you a lot of good to say something about.

I know you are likely completely swamped with the PR job you are having to do right now, but this might be a good time for TSA to pull in a few more PR people. Despite the bogus articles, your credibility continues to go down the longer it takes to address the hot stories.

From reading all the comments in this thread plus my personal experiences I think we can sum this thread up in to some concise points.

TSA is defending itself from satirical stories.

The public recognizes the stories are satire.

The public also accepts these types of stories as possible fact based solely on TSA's interaction with the public and TSA's track record of violating the public trust on numerous occasions.

The real issue is why is it necessary for TSA to use resources to counter these stories.

I think I can shed light on that point.

A couple of months ago going through screening in Las Vegas I noted a situation that I felt needed to be reported to TSA supervisors. After clearing screening I sought out a supervisor. A podium area had several TSA types standing around so I approached and asked a TSA 2 stripper if I could speak to a manager. He immediately went defensive and told me that TSA has no such position as a manager. So here we go playing games about the nomenclature of TSA titles when all I wanted to do was point out a situation.

I left knowing a couple of things, this TSA location had very little or no supervision of the workers, didn't really care for any input from the public and left me with decidedly little respect for TSA.

Adding to other prior negative experiences in FLL, PBI and DFW adds to my personal library of TSA stories and gives credence to other stories making it to the net such as the woman held hostage by TSA for no other reason that asking that her breast milk be screened by some method other than xray, even while a suited TSA employee participated in the incident.

Bob, TSA, and TSA employees, if you wish the public to not believe these kind of stories the first step will require TSA to address its lack of effective leadership.

That is the root problem.

Of course TSA will likely not want any input from the public and will continue down the same path and these kind of stories will continue to be reported.

I had not read these stories but I have seen numerous reports about a vet going through the scanner and getting an enhanced patdown due to her panty liner showing up as an anomaly, along with numerous other reports about feminine hygiene products showing up in body scans. Can you address this one? Also what about skirts? Are these considered bulky? Always? Sometimes? There are lots of reports that women in skirts are being pulled for secondary. I would think such things would be addressed on your web site under traveler information. You even have a section on how to expedite security which does not mention bulky clothing or outerwear much less skirts.

Defending yourself from satire is a cheap trick. Obviously those articles are comedy. Articles about the man covered in his own urine after the TSA's loving treatment are not.

You fail to address those real incidents, and waste our time and tax dollars on articles that probably no one thought was real in the first place. The upshot is that it looks like there are no real abuses for which you should answer--because if there were why would you be wasting your time on this trivia? Of course you would not, if the TSA were not a propaganda machine these days. Sadly, propaganda is all we get from you.

At least this is another wonderful example of that. (Blogger Bob, aren't you at least a little ashamed of yourself?)

I just wanted to point out that for every worthless, abusive, hide-bound, and martinet TSO I have encountered in my travels, I have also found people working for the TSA in such places as Seatac, Bellingham, O'Hare and Atlanta that are professional, courteous, and considerate to the flying public. Not every TSO out there is a disgrace to the uniform, but unfortunately those failures are the only ones we hear about.

Since the TSA has proven time and time again that it has no pressing interest in policing their employees, the public must do it for them.If you actually encounter one of those rare TSOs that is actually treating you humanely, thank them. For all the rest, please tell you congress-critter the date, time, and location, as well as pertinent details.

The TSA loves transparency when you want to debunk someone. Somebody exaggerates their story at the airport and you've got video all over this blog. However, when the TSA is caught dead to rights you stonewall and hide behind baloney like "TSA employee privacy."

We see the videos, captured by your own cameras, of people being assaulted, verbally abused and humiliated by TSA agents. And where is the responsibility? If a passenger assaults a TSA agent they will go to jail. When a TSA agent assaults a passenger what happens? You are not law enforcement. You are not allowed to slam people up against walls. But, it happens, it's documented and nothing happens to the agents that did it.

Retaliatory screening is not allowed. However, we see a woman asserting her rights over breast milk, attempting to explain the TSA's own policies to the agents and she is humiliated, forced to wait for over an hour for no good reason and then, the next time she comes through that same checkpoint, targeted.

Where is the investigation? Where are the agents being sacked because of this?

When a TSA agent brings a gun to the checkpoint is he fired? No.

Your own lack of transparency and responsibility to the American people is what results in these kind of stories being taken seriously. If you were the professionals you claim to be no one would take it seriously.

GSOLTSO said...Anon sez - "What about the mother who had her baby taken away and out of sight?"

That was addressed here - http://www.tsa.gov/blog/2009/10/response-to-tsa-agents-took-my-son.html

According to the story publicized and the video tape, the vast majority of what was claimed was disproven.

WestTSA Blog Team

December 5, 2010 7:25 AM---------------------------------At last -question asked and question answered. A perfect responce from TSA.

Bit of a shame 'cos it seems that only the 'made up' stories are comented upon by TSA to prove themselves in a good light, with all those nastypassangers/bloggers/media people out to get you. Of course still no answers to those baby milk/glass box/$10000 fine/urostomy bag etc issues. Until you address ALL issues people will continue to see this blog as a biased propaganda outlet and treat your statments with the suspecion it deserves

So, "Bob", do a blog posting late on a Friday afternoon, join the comments for a half-hour, then let the entire weekend go by as you, rightfully, are slammed for responding to satire rather than real stories. Your handling of communications is every bit as competent as the TSA's management of its screeners. Bravo.

This post wasn't very useful. The kind of people who believe anything are going to be reading this.

I also understand that there will be occasional TSA agents who do stupid things, it happens in any large group of people.

I think what's needed is for the TSA to have a clear procedure for reporting problems and an independent group to investigate these reports. Look at any large police department for examples.

There also need to be public punishment for TSA agents that step over the line. The public needs to know that someone is paying attention. The TSA agents also need to know that someone is watching over their shoulders.

First, humor and satire have to have an element of truth to be perceived as funny. The Dilbert cartoons are a perfect example -- ask anyone who works in Corporate America. Given the chatter on this blog and elsewhere, there is almost no scenario that's too outlandish to have an element of truth.

Second, I've experienced or witnessed some of these problems described on this blog, so that gives the blog chatter additional credibility.

Third, I'm seeing the same problems reported today that I have seen in this blog since it first got started, and I'm seeing the same lack of accountability on the TSA's part. The TSA expects the passengers to be the QA department instead of using proactive measures. Even worse, the TSA has garnered a reputation for ineffective response to passenger complaints -- unhelpful supervisors, "form" responses that don't address the issues raised, etc.

When the whole WBI/AIT situation got started, it was clear that there were major trust issues. (West and I had an interesting exchange of posts on this subject earlier this year.) Instead of dealing with the trust issues, the TSA just trundled along doing the same things, so a lot of people still don't trust the TSA -- including me.

Various ones of us have articulated a lot of specific suggestions on this blog, notably to STOP THE YELLING (ahem, stop the yelling). From the blog chatter, there's still a lot of yelling.

It wouldn't be hard at all to mine this blog for the most commonly noted problems and complaints. Root causes could be analyzed, and appropriate corrective actions devised. I've never been convinced that effective security is mutually exclusive with ordinary civility, common courtesy, and accountability.

I'd have a lot more respect for the TSA if it operated from a mindset of integrity, competence, accountability, civility and courtesy instead of the current mindset of "I can do as I bloody well please, and I have the power to force you to do my bidding."

I used to deride the TSA's personnel as having a Judge Dredd mentality (judge, jury, police, prosecutor, and executioner rolled into one), but changed my mind after seeing the movie again recently. Judge Dredd knew "the law" thoroughly, and his motivation was the greater good. He was also accountable for his actions. Too many TSA personnel don't know the rules, are motivated by the opportunity to wield power for their own enjoyment, and are not accountable.

The sooner the TSA gets out of denial about how it is perceived, the sooner the TSA could turn this situation around.

y is this blog the complete opposite of the american judicial system, aka the tsa is guilty until proven innocent. anyone can makeup a story and the bloggers on here take it as fact. of course we will use the excuse, well knowing tsa it could happen... thats totally wrong! you can keep asking about the milk story but bob already said he cant comment on it... please, read the previous comments before repeating what everyone else is saying.

"I just wanted to point out that for every worthless, abusive, hide-bound, and martinet TSO I have encountered in my travels, I have also found people working for the TSA in such places as Seatac, Bellingham, O'Hare and Atlanta that are professional, courteous, and considerate to the flying public."

I expect every taxpayer funded TSO to be professional, courteous and considerate. Why do you accept anything less?

Firing TSOs that fail to meet standards would be a good start but it would likely leave the TSA severely understaffed.

Instead of actually taking the time to discuss the legitimate accounts of humiliation and abuse out there--e.g. x-ray baby formula mom in Phoenix and the horrible urostomy bag incident--TSA picks the low hanging fruit and, yet again, shows us it's cluelessness. Also, the administration has just said, "Tough" about this policy. Notice that? Nobody's really come back and said, "We'll review the backscatter policy." This president has basically told us to shut up and get in the x-ray scanner and follow that "horse and pony show."

Given that the TSA only comments on satire and stories they can spin to make themselves look good, we can take the perspective that if the TSA doesn't post publically on something after it's been out for a week, we can safely say the account is accurate (i.e. the nursing mother, the cancer survivors, the child with the knee brace)

Remember! Write your preferred airline and airports, your congressmen and senators! And state level government too; they're starting to take interest on this too.

What about the recent accounts of TSA behavior toward Stacey Armato? Should we also not believe that? Because it sounds like we can follow your policies to the letter, but when we show up at the security line those policies change based on the whims of your agents.

And what of the statement of Nico Melendez, TSA spokesman, who said in reference to a group of very professional agents -- including the one who conducted a pat-down -- that were pointing and smiling at D'Ericco after the pat-down that "people who are celebrities shouldn't be surprised if and when they're recognized."

They shouldn't be, but that's not what this is about, is it? Frankly, his statement is insulting. It boils down to "she's a celebrity. What's the big deal?" What's next: "She asked for it" perhaps?

I can't wait for the video on this one Bob... And, of course, the inevitable "we cannot comment on this because of privacy concerns" line. That's always good for a laugh.

I just wanted to say I just return from a visit to Harrisburg Pa frm Orl Fl and because of what I heard on TV I almost opted to not go seee my grandchildren, thank God I went, where are these people and places you hear abt/ IMy experience and those atound me this weekend both flights I saw no signs of delay,no one upset and the TSA employees were soo nice, again, I have learned "don't always believe what you hear! Great going TSA!Kat

Still no comment on the Phoenix Breast Milk incident, or the 'got a cutie for you' case, or several other reported abuses? Must be nothing debunkable there, eh.

What about the increasingly large body of evidence indicating that attractive women are being picked for 'random' screening more frequently than any other group of traveller? No debunking there either, other than repeating the mantra that it can't happen because it's not SOP - the 'we never make mistakes' response.

TSA is a professional body with no pervy tendencies, no punitive searches, and no abuse of power - Don't you believe it.

It's one thing that your agents make up their own rules -- or ignoring rules when they are presented to them. It's another to use their power to harass a traveler for personal and punitive reasons.

If this is true, there is a very small chance you will address it. Your team excels at handpicking stories, only addressing the negative when no other options remain. However, I can imagine the PR-spun response would include meaningless words like "additional training," "review policies," "rare incident," and other nonsense.

However, if true, anything short of removal of those involved will further weaken this nation's faith that people remain citizens when walking through a checkpoint.

The risk of a terrorist attack is so infinitesimal and its impact so relatively insignificant that it doesn't make rational sense to accept the suspension of liberty for the sake of avoiding a statistical anomaly. There's no purpose in security if it debases the very life it intends to protect, yet the forced choice one has to make between privacy and travel does just that. If you want to travel, you have a choice between low-tech fondling or high-tech pornography; the choice, therefore, to relegate your fundamental rights in exchange for a plane ticket. Not only does this paradigm presume that one's right to privacy is variable contingent on the government's discretion and only respected in places that the government doesn't care to look — but it also ignores that the fundamental right to travel has consistently been upheld by the Supreme Court. If we have both the right to privacy and the right to travel, then TSA's newest procedures cannot conceivably be considered legal. The TSA's regulations blatantly compromise the former at the expense of the latter, and as time goes on we will soon forget what it meant to have those rights.

Wow Bob, I am shocked, shocked I tell you. You set up a couple of "Strawmen" stories and then tell us that we shouldn't believe them, and of course we KNEW they were satire all along. But then we post NUMEROUS REAL complaints from REAL people who were abused by TSA staff, and you refuse to allow those messages to be posted.

It's the same old story isn't it? ... just from another angle. Distorting the truth or over exaggeration when reporting is not new, the media have been doing it for decades. The problem is there are plenty of gullible people who believe absolutely any trash they read or hear and never ever question or use their own judgement.

The TSA has proven itself to be profoundly untrustworthy. They have lied to us, mislead us, withheld information from us, and lost important video tapes that would have provided details to abuse that citizens have suffered at the hands of TSA agents.

Dead Dog Bounce said... On the "truth or myth?" theme can you confirm whether refusing to be patted down exposes a passenger to an $11k fine, and John Tyner reported? And can you detail the procedure for appealling such a fine, please? December 3, 2010 8:45 PM-------------------------I have sent an e-mail to legal to find out about the appeal process, but you can read about the fines here.-------------------------Rock said...For once I agree with Blogger Bob. People should take the time to make sure the news they are protesting about is real. Of course it's a lot easier to defend people for making this mistake when these days, truth is stranger than fiction, and these articles - while satirical - are not that different from real ones. Of course there are tons of real stories - the breast milk lady; the TSA putting the CNN reporter on the watch list story; the new polls showing a growing dissatisfaction in the TSA; the stories of lawmakers looking to stop the TSA strip-scanning in their states; and so on that do *not* get covered. Including the ridiculous questions of "this blade is allowed but this identical one with a screw taken out is not" kind of stories. So how about we make a deal, Bob - we'll do our best to ask our outraged and poorly informed brethren to stop spreading lies, and you guys answer some stuff negative to the TSA instead of turning the blog into a auto-propaganda machine. December 3, 2010 8:50 PM-------------------------OK, but if this blog was truly a propaganda machine, would we allow all of the negative comments? As far as the CNN reporter myth, that’s what it is. A myth. We addressed it in 2008 and I’m not quite sure why Drudge and Infowars regurgitated it. You can read about it here.-------------------------Anonymous said...Hi Bob, my first time posting. I'd just like to ask, doesn't it worry the TSA that people hold them in such low regard? What steps are the TSA taking to improve their public image? (Hint : Telling your TSA agents to "tell children the pat downs are a game" is not winning you friends). December 4, 2010 2:24 AM-------------------------Welcome to the blog! First, you need to understand that when needed, children have been hand wanded and have received pat-downs since 2002. We’ve always wanted to find ways to comfort them during the search. We’re not out to traumatize anybody, we’re trying to keep air travel safe. Many of us have kids of our own and we want to make the process as friendly as possible. -------------------------Anonymous said...There is a lot of good information here... Please tell me specifically what law says I am obligated to finish/complete the security process once it begins under penalty of $10,000 OR $11,000? I want to read it for myself. Thanks JB December 4, 2010 3:15 AM-------------------------The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, in United States v. Aukai, 497 F.3d 955, noted the following: “requiring that a potential passenger be allowed to revoke consent to an ongoing airport security search makes little sense in a post-9/11 world. Such a rule would afford terrorists multiple opportunities to attempt to penetrate airport security by ‘electing not to fly’ on the cusp of detection until a vulnerable portal is found.”

RB said...A couple of months ago going through screening in Las Vegas I noted a situation that I felt needed to be reported to TSA supervisors. After clearing screening I sought out a supervisor. A podium area had several TSA types standing around so I approached and asked a TSA 2 stripper if I could speak to a manager. He immediately went defensive and told me that TSA has no such position as a manager. So here we go playing games about the nomenclature of TSA titles when all I wanted to do was point out a situation. December 4, 2010 9:42 AM-------------------------RB. I know you’re not a fan of Talk to TSA, but I can guarantee that the managers would have been very interested in hearing more about this account. -------------------------Ms.Concernedflyer said... I had not read these stories but I have seen numerous reports about a vet going through the scanner and getting an enhanced patdown due to her panty liner showing up as an anomaly, along with numerous other reports about feminine hygiene products showing up in body scans. Can you address this one? Also what about skirts? Are these considered bulky? Always? Sometimes? There are lots of reports that women in skirts are being pulled for secondary. I would think such things would be addressed on your web site under traveler information. You even have a section on how to expedite security which does not mention bulky clothing or outerwear much less skirts. December 4, 2010 2:33 PM-------------------------I’ve reached out to a few folks to see if I can get some answers. -------------------------Anonymous said... I just wanted to point out that for every worthless, abusive, hide-bound, and martinet TSO I have encountered in my travels, I have also found people working for the TSA in such places as Seatac, Bellingham, O'Hare and Atlanta that are professional, courteous, and considerate to the flying public. Not every TSO out there is a disgrace to the uniform, but unfortunately those failures are the only ones we hear about. Since the TSA has proven time and time again that it has no pressing interest in policing their employees, the public must do it for them. If you actually encounter one of those rare TSOs that is actually treating you humanely, thank them. For all the rest, please tell you congress-critter the date, time, and location, as well as pertinent details. December 4, 2010 8:26 PM-------------------------Tell both of us. We do have a strong interest in addressing concerns from passengers. Use Talk to TSA next time you’d like to report something. -------------------------

Anonymous said...What cracks me up is it probably took you guys a couple hours to figure out those are well known fake news sources. I'm going to give you guys a freebie. If you find a TSA article at The Onion, that's fake too. December 6, 2010 11:44 AM-------------------------Enjoy your laugh. I’ve been reading the Onion for years. I’ve been in the DC area for the last 3 years and you can get the paper version for free. I have 3 locations around my office where I can get a copy and I never miss an issue. I’m the guy on the bus that everybody’s looking at because I’m laughing out loud to the articles. I have the Onion “Our Front Covers” hardback book at my desk. I know what satire is. I pegged this as satire the minute I read it. Others did not. Those are the folks who this post is aimed at. -------------------------chris bray said... Except for leopard print novelty handcuffs, but that's only in MARTA parking lots. December 6, 2010 5:21 PM-------------------------Please explain this one. I’m not aware. -------------------------avxo said... What about Donna D'Errico's story today, available here? Is "you caught my eye" a legitimate excuse to get patted down? And what of the statement of Nico Melendez, TSA spokesman, who said in reference to a group of very professional agents -- including the one who conducted a pat-down -- that were pointing and smiling at D'Ericco after the pat-down that "people who are celebrities shouldn't be surprised if and when they're recognized." They shouldn't be, but that's not what this is about, is it? Frankly, his statement is insulting. It boils down to "she's a celebrity. What's the big deal?" What's next: "She asked for it" perhaps? I can't wait for the video on this one Bob... And, of course, the inevitable "we cannot comment on this because of privacy concerns" line. That's always good for a laugh. December 6, 2010 6:09 PM-------------------------AVXO – I’m looking into getting more details on this. -------------------------Anonymous said... I just wanted to say I just return from a visit to Harrisburg Pa frm Orl Fl and because of what I heard on TV I almost opted to not go seee my grandchildren, thank God I went, where are these people and places you hear abt/ IMy experience and those atound me this weekend both flights I saw no signs of delay,no one upset and the TSA employees were soo nice, again, I have learned "don't always believe what you hear! Great going TSA! Kat December 7, 2010 5:01 AM-------------------------Thanks for dropping by the blog and letting us know. -------------------------

D'Errico was selected for a scan, not at pat down, at that airport. And then they also scanned + patted down her 17/yo son.

Other than the "you caught my eye" part being concerning (in addition to the TSA spokesperson response.

This is also bothersome, where the scan procedures aren't even explained and you aren't given the option to opt-out.. the machines and procedures don't seem to be labeled or described by charts anymore either:

"They never even told me what they were doing at all, or that I had any choice," she said. "It was just, 'Stand here. Raise your arms above your head like this.' They never told me that they were going to be conducting a full-body scan, or that I had the option of being searched instead. Had they explained what they were doing, I would have opted for the search. As a matter of fact, my son was made to not only go through the full-body scan, but they also conducted a pat-down search on him as well.

I think what many who follow this blog are trying to say is this: The TSA is not trustworthy. Blogger Bob, as an employee of the TSA, is also not trustworthy.

More and more of us are refusing to fly within, into, or out of this country because we are being forced to surrender our basic dignity to do so.

Time and again, security experts have shown that the TSA's procedures are sorely missing the S (security) because they are reactive and not proactive with little sense of strategy. You look for things which will no longer be used by any vaguely intelligent attacker, and you alienate travelers with your tactics. You also fail to address the fact that the full body scanners cannot, in fact, detect the explosives they are there to detect.

Why are you not opening dialogs with the American, German, and Israeli security practitioners who are, frankly, showing you up at ever turn?

It seems that you are very quick to post comments from people who have had the good fortune of NOT being abused by the TSA, but even after numerous requests for comments about the over 1,000 complaints that have been lodged at the ACLU, the TSA Blogmeisters have not addressed those complaints. The Propaganda Machine keeps churning out it's waste.

The leadership at the TSA considers us "Domestic Extremists" if we oppose their gross violation of our Constitutional Rights.

".....The memo reportedly labels opponents of the TSA’s heavy-handed groping, naked-body scanners, and other procedures as “domestic extremists.” Federal bureaucrats are actually instructed to identify and electronically report individuals falling under the “extremist” classification — including “any person, group or alternative media source” opposed to the TSA’s Fourth Amendment violations — to the Homeland Environment Threat Analysis Division, the “Extremism and Radicalization” branch of the Office of Intelligence & Analysis section of the DHS. The dragnet also includes anyone who “supports and/or elicits support” for people causing “disruptions.”

OK, now that you have posted my comments about the TSA labeling citizens who actually understand and support the Bill of Rights, how about addressing the matter of the TSA labeling us as "Domestic Extremists" Are law abiding citizens who preserve, protect and defend the Constitution the ENEMY of the TSA/Feds now? If so, we have a lot more to be concerned with besides nail clippers, don't we?

Please answer the question. "Are those of us who believe that the Bill of Rights is worth defending and are therefore opposed to the continuation of the 4th Amendment considered to be "Domestic Extremists" by Homeland Security and the TSA?

RB. I know you’re not a fan of Talk to TSA, but I can guarantee that the managers would have been very interested in hearing more about this account. .........................

Bob, based on experiences at FLL and DFW "Talk to TSA" is about as useful as any other means of trying to work with TSA.

TSA seems only interested in shifting fault to other parties, never accepting responsibility, covering up criminal acts by TSA employees and violating the civil rights of citizens and visitors to the USA.

Don't think for a moment that I have forgotten what the FLL FSD did not do to address a complaint!

I have a question regarding the screening of personal baggage: My carry-on baggage has been checked once in about 5 flights I have taken, and, of course, I was present during the inspection. My question is, if my checked baggae is in need of opening, will I be allowed to be present before it is unlocked? This is yet another question many people has asked, though rhetorically. Can an official TSA representative answer that for me?.. Thanks

Blogger Bob said...OK, but if this blog was truly a propaganda machine, would we allow all of the negative comments?

Sure. You'd just not respond to them. That way, you can point to the fact that you 'allowed' their posting to 'prove' that you aren't just a propaganda machine, while not having to actually deal with any of the issues that are raised. All while implying that those comments aren't worthy of your response.

As far as the CNN reporter myth, that’s what it is. A myth. We addressed it in 2008 and I’m not quite sure why Drudge and Infowars regurgitated it. You can read about it here.

"The TSA, which is a part of the Department of Homeland Security, said Griffin's name wasn't even on the watch list, and the agency blamed the airlines for the delays the reporter experienced. The airlines, on the other hand, said they were simply following a list provided by TSA."

Sheesh, Bob. You don't keep up with things, do you? Try Googling "Randall Scott King"."A TSA agent who worked in Atlanta's Hartsfield-Jackson International Airport has been arrested for allegedly abducting a woman and sexually assaulting her."..."A relative brought the woman, who was still bound in leopard print, novelty handcuffs, to the Union City Police Department..."

Anonymous said... Please answer the question. "Are those of us who believe that the Bill of Rights is worth defending and are therefore opposed to the continuation of the 4th Amendment considered to be "Domestic Extremists" by Homeland Security and the TSA?

Please answer this simple question.-----------------------------------The answer is as simple as your question. Its obvious that you do not know what you are talking about. But you already knew that.

Seriously, Bob. We know the difference between fact and fiction. That's why very few of us believe half the crap spouted by you and the TSA. We're really not as dumb as you think we are. So, when you say things like "Scanners are safe," "The TSA is here to help you," and "We're not sexually assaulting your children and grannies" we don't believe them. Not for a second.

After initially LYING to the American people about the incident in Utah where the TSA agent was video recording doing a modified GENTIAL SEARCH on the young boy with his shirt off. When confronted with eyewitnesses to the event, the TSA has finally admitted that the boy did NOT set off the alarm on the metal detector like they had originally claimed.

In case after case, in instance after instance, in incident after incident the TSA and it's agents are shown to by willing to LIE to the public about the rules and procedures at the checkpoints, the actions of the TSA agents, the safety and efffectiveness of the scanners, the purpose behind the PUNATIVE GROIN SEARCHES, and the FACTS about what they are doing to the public.

Here are the much requested, much anticipated, full body images of millimeter wave - both front and back, male and female just like so many of you asked for.

These were provided to TSA by the manufacturer of the technology, L-3. We asked L-3 to blur the facial features just like they are blurred when our officers see the images in Phoenix, Baltimore, LAX and JFK. These are exactly what officers see at airports today and will see in future deployments.

Why did we decide to put them up now? Because you've asked for it... Hopefully the editors of Reader's Digest will consider these for their next cover.

What do you think?

- Bob

..................Bob, I would think, "Don't You Believe It" is exactly right!

The post above was a personal attack by a TSA employee -- it seems this is pretty demonstrative of what's going on in the airport check-point field, no?

And for the record, i'm just pointing out the obvious, so I wouldn't expect this to be censored. But I think the post is pretty telling. --------------------------Anonymous said...Please answer the question. "Are those of us who believe that the Bill of Rights is worth defending and are therefore opposed to the continuation of the 4th Amendment considered to be "Domestic Extremists" by Homeland Security and the TSA?

Please answer this simple question. -----------------------------------TSORon said...The answer is as simple as your question. Its obvious that you do not know what you are talking about. But you already knew that.

"Anonymous said...Please answer the question. "Are those of us who believe that the Bill of Rights is worth defending and are therefore opposed to the continuation of the 4th Amendment considered to be "Domestic Extremists" by Homeland Security and the TSA?

Please answer this simple question.-----------------------------------TSORon said...The answer is as simple as your question. Its obvious that you do not know what you are talking about. But you already knew that."

Care to amplify your legal analysis, TSMORon? I, for one, think the original poster was on to something.

An Anonymous poster asked...Care to amplify your legal analysis, TSORon? I, for one, think the original poster was on to something.--------------------------------Despite your spelling intentional error I believe that it is my responsibility to correct your erroneous assumptions. Below are the links that prove beyond any doubt that the original poster I responded to did not know what they were talking about. Please take a few moments to read through the documents, they are educational and very much on point. They are also from the supreme court in our land, tasked with deciding what is and is not within the confines of the our countries constitution.

You don’t have to believe me, remaining ignorant is a choice I believe that you will continue to make.(http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions...umes/531bv.pdf)(http://supreme.justia.com/us/531/32/case.html)

While the Supreme Court may have issued a ruling that "Administrative Searches" can be conducted without warrents and without probable cause DOES NOT MEAN THAT THE ORIGINAL INTENT OF THE 4TH AMENDMENT HAS NOT BEEN ERODED!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

WHAT IT MEANS IS THAT OUR FREEDOMS ARE EVEN MORE AT RISK FROM CONTINUING EROSION THAN EVER.

No one can possibly argue that ANY Judicial ruling that so clearly violates the obvious and clear intent of the actual language of the 4th Amendment is anything other than encroaching tyranny.

Futhermore, you never addressed the other part of the question and that is the memo sent out by the Leadership of Homeland Security which describes people who still believe in the Bill of Rights as "Domestic Extremists"

Care to address that point, or will you just censor this comment like you do with 75% of my comments?

TSRON, you are the one that doesn't know what you are talking about. There was an internal memo from Homeland Security that described "Domestic Extremists". The people who are claimed to pose a danger to our nation included, 2nd Amendment Supporters, Veterans, people opposed to abortion, people concerned with Constitutional Rights and even supporters of Ron Paul. Now, this is simply a documented fact. And the fact that YOU DON'T KNOW ABOUT IT MEANS THAT YOU ARE IGNORANT OF THE FACTS AND THE TRUTH.

TSORon said...Anonymous said...I see, so that TSA can post personal attacks, but mere citizens, oh WE are held accountable to the rules, right?

----------------------

I get posts bounced too, so the idea that TSA employees get a free pass is ludicrous. It was not an attack, it was an observation, and to me pretty much an obvious fact.

As for the remainder of your post, it might be time to get some new foil.